Archive for April 7th, 2009

h1

Yo athletes! What’s your preferred online training log?

April 7, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

OK folks, exercise time … I am just Type-A enough to keep a training log, and lazy enough to do it online and want it to be simple but to do the calculations for me (like running paces, 100 swim split times, etc.). I used to use the log at Beginner Triathlete, but it is WAY over-the-top more detailed than I am ever likely to use. Their discussion forums and articles are great, though.

Navigating all of their options was not working for me, so I switched to Daily Mile. Nice, clean interface, great visual display of my training record for the week, can scroll through past months … but the online community there just isn’t my vibe. Not bad, just not my thing.

I also have a profile on athlinks, which is really cool because it pulls in your race results for as far back as I’ve got online race results. They have a little box on your profile called “WDYDT” for “what did you do today?”, and that’s meant to be a quick note on your training that day. For me, this is not detailed enough, and does not provide enough pre-programmed data analysis.

In other dimensions I am indifferent among the three.

Do you know of/use/recommend any other online training log? Do you have opinions about these? I am keen to hear some other opinions than my own.

Posted in Sport and fitness | 2 Comments »

h1

Pete Leeson: Why failure is valuable

April 7, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

Along the same theme from yesterday that other people are writing very sensible things about the folly of our current federal government policies, I draw your attention to Pete Leeson’s excellent op-ed in Friday’s Washington Times. His theme: business failures are a valuable and important part of economic processes, and when we stifle those failures we do ourselves harm because we distort and truncate the reallocation of resources from less-valuable uses to more-valuable uses:

Far from cause for concern, this failure is cause for celebration. When ineffective producers fail, resources committed to producing goods we value less are freed for producing goods we value more. Polaroid’s failure released resources for the production of digital cameras; Commodore Computers’ failure released resources for the production of IBM computers; and Chi Chi’s restaurant’s failure released resources for, well, the production of food that tastes good. Who better to sacrifice the resources required to expand production of the things we want than producers of the things we don’t?

If government prevents failing producers from going out of business, resources get “stuck” in employments where they’re less productive. We can’t have as many of the products we care more about because the means needed to make them remain locked in the manufacture of products we care less about. Society suffers as a result.

We are living with the distortionary incentives of the “too big to fail” and “too important to fail” arguments that we’ve heard daily for the past eight months, and we’ll be paying the costs of these flawed policies for years to come.

Relatedly, Shika Dalmia’s article in Reason today reminds us that “by avoiding bankruptcy, GM only risks trading union demands for federal tyranny”.

Posted in Economics | 3 Comments »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41 other followers